Hi Bruno > I think non-symmetric functors are rarely necessary since most > combinations can be dealt with via inheritance (e.g. Frict vs CohFrict > is interpreted as Frict vs. Frict since CohFrict inherits from Frict).
Exactly, but what if you want it to behave it like a cohesive contact. This is not possible at the current stage. So non-symmetric Ip2 functors would make sense here, right? And looking at the variety of material we have (some are not inherited from FrictMat) I can see some more benefits. > However, I am like you, I don't see the reason why it is asserted > symmetric. I suggest to try your idea after removing this constraint and > see if it works as accepted. Ok, I will try. Any idea about the goReverse? Can it be removed? Klaus _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev Post to : yade-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
